Locking threads in the Bitching Parlor?

[CoHo]

What the hell? I thought it was created for the sole reason of being completely unmediated?

[coffeezombie]

Yeah. Perhaps Claverhouse was worried it might actually lead to real violence. Seriously, I've never seen people fight so idiotically before I came onto this board. And this place is supposed to be for INTPs?

[Star]

Maybe if we had a cleansing of the non-INTPs there would be less conflict.

:devil:

[CoHo]

Perhaps Claverhouse was worried it might actually lead to real violence.

Even still, I would have expected an explanation, not a simple "This thread is now locked"

[coffeezombie]

Maybe if we had a cleansing of the non-INTPs there would be less conflict.


Well, some of the people who merely think they are INTPs are part of the problem too.

[Star]

Well, some of the people who merely think they are INTPs are part of the problem too.
Names! I want names.

[songbird36]

It was probably locked because it was too annoying for the general populace on here.

[CoHo]

...But it is the B I T C H I N G P A R L O R

[coffeezombie]

It was probably locked because it was too annoying for the general populace on here.

But the point is that going onto that part of the board is supposed to be like going into the mature section of the board. Don't peek if you can't handle it. If the mods want to get rid of the parlor then it's their perogative but why keep it if they are going to occasionally lock things?

[Claverhouse]

There are always rules. And there are always idiots.

Once a thread starts on a false premise: x made me a death-threat; continues through


I don't see a lot of room for semantics on this issue. Sorry. If someone feels like there was a threat of death. Then there was.

Of course. If she were sane, and a friend, I don't think I would be, but she's insane, and an enemy.

The rule is pretty explicit. It says, "No death threats." I'm sure the intention was for people not to make death threats. There are lots of threats that aren't death threats. Like, "I'm going to have you banned," or "I'm going to screw your girlfriend." Why not use some of those? I think once death is involved a person has crossed the line, no matter who that person is.


And it's not as if the "defendant" here is a valued member of our society, and deserves exemption. Everyone else wins.

No. But she does have a history of being delusional. Who knows how far she will go.

No. Here's a simple one. Kiss my ass!

Do you want me to lodge a complaint about you exhorting me to suicide then (as you recently did), or suggesting that I should run my car off the road?
to


You're fucking retarded. We all know what she said. Most of us know that wasn't a suggestion, and that third party suggestions of murder aren't excuses.

By the way, I do hope you die, but I'm not going to kill you. Feel safe? I don't.
even the hard of understanding realises that the thread needs putting out of it's agony.

Since neither party is going to be with us, and there's peace throughout the land, why bother going over the gruesome details ? The Bitching Parlour is open to all, but that doesn't include idiots. Because the forum is not going to have idiots.


Pax Vobisicum


Claverhouse :ph34r:

[Star]

Because the forum is not going to have idiots.

And yet, Thermo is still here.

PS, ban me too.

[tragula]

I've always been a firm advocate of clear rules for keeping the forum civilized, and people who aren't afraid to take a bite out of crime to back them up.

When you keep things fuzzy and flexible and start voting on stuff, and providing outlets for negativity, it eventually (either really quickly, or unbearably slowly) devolves into chaos and general nastiness.

Let's not forget that this is probably a blessing in disguise for them, allowing them to do more productive things with their time.

[garak]

Because the forum is not going to have idiots.
/me wonders how someone given such power could honestly believe such an absurd thing

[CoHo]

even the hard of understanding realises that the thread needs putting out of it's agony.

That's an interesting way to describe people that disagree with you.

Why don't you just remove the Bitching Parlor then if you are going to apply the same rules to it as all the other sections? What's the point?

[Sackanaka]

Removing the bitching parlor is a greater good than banning two members? It was apparently so necessary for the "majority" of members that it was made in the first place- and now this?
Give it to us- thanks- I don't want it anymore, there's something better, take it back-

There was a rule, a rule to which even Edmond Zedo agreed upon, and that is regulation of the rule of "No Death Threats." It was broken, one way or another.

[CoHo]

Removing the bitching parlor is a greater good than banning two members?

If they are going to moderate the board why fucking have it?

[Sackanaka]

If they are going to moderate the board why fucking have it?

Because leakage (into other forums) is just something they can't control without getting to the source.